Maybe it is like this: Those who most identify themselves as Buddhists while living in comfort and overseeing the world through the divine eye of the internet with their immaculate emancipated wisdom will be the first to advocate killing when things get tough politically in some other part of the world, some other culture, some other society that is seen and identified with as "Buddhist", "mine, all mine".

Oh, it is shameful.

And all that without even having so much humility as to consider that the whole image and judgement about the - certainly not simple - situations, conflicts and states of affair somewhere else in the world is for the most part nothing else than one's own fantasy, projection, extrapolation of "facts" heard of, seen and read here or there.

Too much information. We think through having all this mass of information we are in a position to judge any situation everywhere, and what should be done there, brought to justice, corrected, true values as we know them established or defended or whatever... This here is just one of these manifestations of arrogance. We are the defenders of all the true values that we see everywhere in the world with our compassionate divine eyes.Even seeing how others die to feed our proud judgemental sensationalism, (Thanks for the video, Martin) we don't see the connection.

But of course, we have to judge.Especially when we have such a radiant Buddha image as an avatar, we are here to save the world after all, spread our metta and wisdom.Are we?Or can we be humble in the face of others' suffering?

Maybe...Let's try.

@marc:

should we in fact, take a pacifistic approach towards extremist mulsim groups and allow them to take over the entire world, destroy all other religions, enact worldwide sharia law?

You might be reborn as a chicken, with your sensationalist apocalyptic visions.

Will wrote: Most Buddhists are not like the few Arhans who follow the Saw Sutta. They will defend themselves and even take preemptive actions against the Muslims.

If some one reject and goes against Buddha's teaching, so he is not a Buddha disciple.Those who go fight and kill others, are not disciples, but the shame of Buddha's name.

IMO.With karuna.

Noble notion Martin - does it apply to Islamic terrorists who blow up innocents? Are they not Muslims? They certainly think they are good Muslims - they quote chapter and verse from the Koran & the Hadith in support of their Jihad.

Is the Dhamma a purely pacifist religion?

In my limited and flawed understanding, the Dhamma is a fine balance between extremes. Buddhism is called the "Middle Path" for a reason.

"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "--------------------------------------------"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation, Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "

perkele wrote:You might be reborn as a chicken, with your sensationalist apocalyptic visions.

I don't find what I said to be sensationalist at all. It is, in fact, in line with the socio-political philosophies & goals of most extremist religious groups (mulsim or otherwise). Wipe out other religions, kill off anyone unwilling to convert, and establish a theocratic ruling system. I would invite you to explore both views and practices of groups like the indian mujahadeen (suspected in the Bodh Gaya bombings) and other similar groups and if I am wrong, please correct me.

how would you, perkele, suppose these types of situations be handled at the societal level?

"It's easy for us to connect with what's wrong with us... and not so easy to feel into, or to allow us, to connect with what's right and what's good in us."

perkele wrote:Don't get involved if you're not part of that society. It's a matter of decency and humility.

I think you would be hard pressed to find a single person on this planet who isn't in some way part of a society that has been attacked and effected by violent religious extremism. So lets say you, perkele, are involved in a society that has been effected... what would you suppose is the best way to handle these type of groups?

I don't see how the decent and humble thing to do is stand back and allow innocent people to be murdered? Can you explain for me how you equate decency and humility with turning a blind eye to those in need who you have no direct involvement with?

Would the decent and humble thing to do [and I realize this is reaching] during WWII have been to stand back and allow the nazis to continue their genocide and eventually take over the whole world? I realize this is a somewhat sensationalist question to ask, but I think it's relevant because the worldviews of both groups are similar... and given the manpower and financial backing certain religious extremists would, I believe, engage in a nazi-esque campaign.

"It's easy for us to connect with what's wrong with us... and not so easy to feel into, or to allow us, to connect with what's right and what's good in us."

Would the decent and humble thing to do [and I realize this is reaching] during WWII have been to stand back and allow the nazis to continue their genocide and eventually take over the whole world?

The question has sometimes been asked "Why was action not taken earlier?" regarding the Nazi regime.But I don't think that much blame is called for here.Serious consideration for the welfare of the own people was the trigger for the intervention by the Americans which led to the end of the war.Of course it becomes a heroic thing, glorified, internationally esteemed, appealing to the public.Now interventionalism has become an ideology sort-of. It is not the welfare of our own society, our own private sphere and immediate surroundings, our family and neighbours, ourselves, that is to be aimed for. It's not heroic enough. We democratically own the whole world. We are all public heroes and through avaaz we can go on the barricades and occupy samsara. Everyone is responsible nowadays for the conflicts here and there, needs to have an opinion at least, to preserve his self-image as a responsible person. This peer pressure for heroism and esteem of heroism is actually what drives such extremists.

I know I'm evading your questions. I don't take them serious. I find them to be insincere.

I don't know what would have happened, had the Americans not intervened so strongly in response to the attack of Pearl Harbour.I do not believe (and do not believe that you actually believe) that the Nazis would have taken over the world. It was a suicide mission right from the start, of course, with horribly (self-)destructive force.I do believe there was much good to the intervention and the "liberation" by the Americans and the other allied forces. There was much reasonable consideration and deliberation involved. It was much about defending their own country, their own welfare. Rather sincere intentions, comparatively speaking.

I do not belive anything close to that is what underlies your (or similarly motivated) arguments here. You have no legitimate grounds for intervention, except social heroism, or a special type of narcissism which is of course everyone's duty nowadays. And maybe a bit religious group identification?

I realize this is a somewhat sensationalist question to ask, but

and you know it.

Not to speak of Will's alluded to gloomy fantasies of a holy war, something like an unspoken call to arms.In another thread about the dharma-ending age he proposed that we as laypeople can only play the role of cheerleaders in these dark times of degeneration. Such gloomy outlooks everywhere. Because people do bad things, in Thailand, in Burma, in Sri Lanka, in monk's robes or with turban's and bombs or whatever.If one was not so involved in one's buddhist identification one could hardly be so depressed by all this.

We live so much in pure fantasy nowadays. It's all about us, our world, our religion, etc. etc. And the more bad things happen here and there, the more we get involved emotionally, the more we intervene with our opinions and armchair superiority. We do have influence on all these things through our greedy hunger for sensation and meaning in our lives, meaning here or there on the other side of the world, information colonialism. We know what's right everywhere. We have to.

But this influence is certainly not a good one by and large.

Cheerleaders and hooligans, locked to their computer screens.

We can make a difference in the world. But that's mostly in our immediate environment, foremostly in ourselves.Humility and decency, responsibility for our own affairs and welfare, social surroundings, there is enough to do for everyone, I am sure.

Coming back to the Nazi regime, surely you have heard about the White Rose?Such good people can exist in every culture, in every regime, cultural clash situation and whatever appears, whether they are muslims, buddhists or whichever social group that is known and identified in the world here or there. And they do make the greatest difference, far greater than any intervention from outside, even if their actions remain largely unnoticed. There are many more, unknown, without names, not looking for esteem and recognition, belonging and identity, but for what is good.We cannot see such things from half around the world and can't tell them what is best.But we can have compassion and see what's best around us.

Ah, and one last thing, regarding the Buddha, and that he did not tell kings to be pacifists.He did not recommend going to war, or even arming up, even in terms of defence anywhere in any case either.And in the case when king Ajatasattu asked him whether it would be a good opportunity to invade this neighbouring kingdom now, he just said, as long as those people adhere to these and those customs that they do, there will be no chance of conquering them.And these customs all had to do with respect, gratitude, mutual care, piety and so on. Nothing about armies, military strength and pride and so on.

I can't believe how people misconstrue this and even suggest otherwise.

Violence happens, hatred will always exist everywhere in many forms. By hating what injustice happens somewhere else in the world we are not helping.Turn a blind eye? We turn a blind eye to what's around us and our real responsibilities often enough, I'm quite sure. To what is far away we are really quite blind despite the illusions of all the media information flood to which we have become addicted.

Excuse my raving. It's my own projection. What else can I offer? What else can we develop here together?

Let me say in closing that I don't regard you as an idiot, even though it may perhaps come off as different at times, and I do hope I have not seriously offended you. I appreciate the opportunity to ramble off my thoughts on these matters.Let's leave it at that and turn back to our lives with a friendly attitude.

May the force be with you.

Last edited by perkele on Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:18 am, edited 2 times in total.

Everyone's quick to pounce on the muslims, but in the recent conflicts, The Americans and their allies have killed way way more muslims, than muslims have killed us, so were the ones collectively with the most blood on our hands, through supporting our governments policies. To think that puts us in a position to be making moral judgements about a confict in Myanmar, a country we know next to nothing about, purely on reading a few highly biased articles, doesn't seem that wise to me. For instance in this current bombing in Bodhgaya we haven't even established it isn't Hindu extremists, not muslims, or just plain crazy terrorists unaffiliated with any organized religion.

18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community that has so generously given me so much, sincerely former monk John

perkele wrote:I know I'm evading your questions. I don't take them serious. I find them to be insincere.

i promise you my questions are sincere and were born simply from my own ethical contemplation in regards to self-defense. i'm not suggestion Buddhists take up harming.. i'm just saying we shouldn't develop righteous attitudes over things like pacifism or be so quick to think that projecting rules related to personal Dhamma practice upon society at large will create a peaceful society, given that not everyone will follow them.

Let's leave it at that and turn back to our lives with a friendly attitude.

May the force be with you.

"It's easy for us to connect with what's wrong with us... and not so easy to feel into, or to allow us, to connect with what's right and what's good in us."

perkele wrote:I know I'm evading your questions. I don't take them serious. I find them to be insincere.

i promise you my questions are sincere and were born simply from my own ethical contemplation in regards to self-defense. i'm not suggestion Buddhists take up harming.. i'm just saying we shouldn't develop righteous attitudes over things like pacifism or be so quick to think that projecting rules related to personal Dhamma practice upon society at large will create a peaceful society, given that not everyone will follow them.

Thanks, yes, you're quite right in that. We should not impose our righteous attitudes about how the ideal buddhists should act somewhere else. Nor should we condone violence.Hence my (perhaps quite involved) stance for non-involvement.

marc108 wrote:

Let's leave it at that and turn back to our lives with a friendly attitude.

May the force be with you.

It has been a pleasure.

Last edited by perkele on Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Bhikkhus, if you develop and make much this one thing, it invariably leads to weariness, cessation, appeasement, realization and extinction. What is it? It is recollecting the Enlightened One. If this single thing is recollected and made much, it invariably leads to weariness, cessation, appeasement, realization and extinction.Anguttara-Nikaya: Ekanipata: Ekadhammapali: PañhamavaggaBuddhanussatiSCVSMVMMBS

I'm seeing this a lot on internet forums; people pronouncing who is or isn't a Buddhist. I suppose I cling to certain conceptions in this matter as well. I had hoped to find a forum where such divisive behavior wasn't displayed by "Buddhists". I had hoped to find a forum where the ego was not so prevalent in discussions. I had hoped to find a forum where there was not a tone of "my Buddhism is better than your Buddhism" or "my understanding of Buddhism is better than your understanding of Buddhism". I had hoped to find a forum where there was compassion displayed between the members, even towards the ones with whom we disagreed.

I have found none of those places. Instead, I found forums where people are still on the boat crossing the river. I found forums where practicing Buddhists still cling to concepts, still have some ignorance, and still have fetters to shed. Am I to discount that all of these people who still have fetters, who still display their ego (proudly in some cases), who are still ignorant, and who still cling as not being Buddhists? If that were the case, based on the threads that I've read, I'd have to conclude that there are very few actual Buddhists on Buddhist forums. But then I know I'd only be operating on my conception of what a Buddhist is.

Who here has crossed the river such than they can pronounce who is really a "Buddhist" and who is not?

The choice I face is to abandon forums as not being particularly helpful in my understanding and learning of Buddhism, or to face the disappointment caused by my (mis)conceptions of what to expect from Buddhist forums and realize THAT is the obstacle, not the behavior of others. Or, are both correct?

Martin Po wrote:Marc, are you ready to kill ? Imagine, you take a gun, and you blow his face off, becasue of his wrong view. Are you ready to do that?

Myself, personally... no. But nor am I will to disband the military in hopes my Metta will stop extremist groups from murdering.

I'm not personally ready or willing to kill either (unless the unfortunate occasion arose in which, to save my child from attempted killing or abduction, killing the would-be killer / abductor was the only way I could save my child. Otherwise, no).

But I would also not be willing to sit around pontificating about non-violence, if in the event of a foreign invasion of my homeland, my fellow countrymen and women were risking life and limb to preserve our way of life, our freedom to not be a subjugated population and possibly even our freedom to practice whatever religion we like without fear of getting imprisoned or beheaded. I would feel like a cowardly hypocrite if I did not assist with the defence of our land in any non-violent way possible (such as a medic or stretcher-bearer) whilst yet being quite happy to enjoy the freedoms that my fellow countrymen and women had fought and died for.

Of course how I would feel about this would change if I were say, an anagami or an arahant. But for now I must say, I am a Buddhist and I don't even kill a mosquito that is trying to bite me, but there are certain situations that could arise in which I might (unwillingly) have to either use violence myself, or actively support others who are doing so.

Then the Blessed One, picking up a tiny bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monk, "There isn't even this much form...feeling...perception...fabrications...consciousness that is constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change, that will stay just as it is as long as eternity." (SN 22.97)

Hi ManasI know exactly what you are talking about. Without going to details, just have faith on Buddha. Just do anything to get out of this place (Samsara) . Many will follow you if you do it!You will save many more lives.

SarathW wrote:Hi ManasI know exactly what you are talking about. Without going to details, just have faith on Buddha. Just do anything to get out of this place (Samsara) . Many will follow you if you do it!You will save many more lives.

Thank you Sarath, I will try. I can't guarantee how long it will take though, or how many lifetimes, etc. But I hope all of us here, reach the ending of all stress. May all beings reach the ending of all stress!

metta

Then the Blessed One, picking up a tiny bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monk, "There isn't even this much form...feeling...perception...fabrications...consciousness that is constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change, that will stay just as it is as long as eternity." (SN 22.97)

I'm seeing this a lot on internet forums; people pronouncing who is or isn't a Buddhist.

If there is Triple Gem4 Noble TruthNoble Eightfold PathRespect of Virtue (Patimokkha and 5-8-10 precepts)So there is Lord Buddha's Teaching. If there is not, so there is not Lord Buddha's Teaching. It's as simple as that.

If some one is not agree, i would like to understand why they belief that there is Buddha Dhamma out of Buddha Teaching.